Immunity when assisting LE

Status
Not open for further replies.
I don't have a problem with law enforcement, I guess I just have a problem with the way things are today. We (society) lives as if police and civil serivice are around to pick up after us. I honestly think that the number of police should be reduced and people should be required to police themselves.

A responsible society takes responsibility for itself... It doesn't appoint people who are expected to do it all for them, while they get drunk, chase women, et cetera.

My $0.02 worth.
 
Great topic

I would treat it with great caution. Grave danger to a LEO would constitute an appropriate response (i.e. deadly force). Other danger to a LEO would require an equal response. I would not get involved unless requested specifically by a LEO, or if the LEO was in obvious danger and was unable to find safety (i.e. being fired upon and pinned down, or unconsious). WHere are our LEO guys at with their 2 cents?
 
I live in a semi-rural county outside of Atlanta. Not too long after we moved here, my wife offered assitance to a woman whose ex-husband kidnapped her and would have likely killed her. She called 911 and then me, it took me 10 minutes to get to her location, an off duty deputy beat me by seven minutes. Hell yeah I would help those guys out if they needed it.

Wheeler
 
It is a fundamentally bad idea, when a cop is in trouble, to pull out a gun.

In my state, you retain all the rights and responsibilities of a third party when you act in their defense. This means, there is a VERY short list of people I know well enough to throw lead on their behalf. I even have family members who, if they suddenly told me I needed to pull out my gun, I wouldn't do it, because I don't trust them that much.

I would be more inclined to help someone I didn't know, including a cop, if the situation was so overwhelmingly violent that I could argue it was necessary to defend myself. If I saw several people walk into a mall with rifles and heard gunfire, (as in, "The Teeth of the Tiger", by Tom Clancy,) I would be inclined to rush in. Anything less obviously grave directly to me and my family, I will retreat and escape.
 
You would be screwing yourself up the a%% should you decide to pull a John Rambo and come to the help of a police officer (like he helped them lol he had first blood). Yes, in some states this action is most likely encouraged and likely exempt from prosecution in criminal court. In others, you're up crap creek. If you know the letter of the law verbatim, and are sure you're in the right, then by all means go for it. Most likely, you'll still be w/o paid counsel in the eventof a civil trial... the cops won't pay for your defense, I can about guarantee it.

Honestly, I'm not that inhuman to where I could stand to watch a cop get beaten down by a perp. If I saw such action, I would immediately retreat to a safe spot, call 911 and trust the perps in blue to save their own. It's not my job to protect them. Anything else, such as drawing down, you're more likely to be charged than praised. If they wanted my help, they wouldn't advocate restricting my firearms rights... or condone them by these searches in NO... let them do what they want... I won't help. They move on me w/o reason, watch out.

ftf
 
Honestly, I'm not that inhuman to where I could stand to watch a cop get beaten down by a perp. If I saw such action, I would immediately retreat to a safe spot, call 911 and trust the perps in blue to save their own.
Click to expand...

Thanks.

Rest assured, that if I saw such action being committed against you, that I would immediately intervene and use the minimum force necessary to stop the assailant from beating on you.
 
LEO Perspective

I have very few posts on this forum, so I'll temper my response appropriately.

First of all, I (as I assume most of you) see this happening only under the most dire (read "life or death) of circumstances, and rarely. I work in a fairly large metropolitan city, and our backup is seldom far away. This isn't so for a lot of the State Troopers. I'd hate to think that if I were to find myself losing the fight for my life, armed citizens would "call 911 and take cover" to save their own a@#es from a lawsuit. I understand if you don't want to put your life on the line for a stranger (that's what we do), but watch another human be killed and do nothing because you're afraid of getting sued or you're mad at them for how they feel about an armed citizenry? How about you come to my house and explain that one to my wife and daughter, or yours for that matter? What a proud moment.

By the way, most cops in my area don't feel strongly either way about CCW permits, we're a little too busy dealing with criminals, and from my personal experience, that's not who gets the permits.

perps in blue
Click to expand...
FTF, I can only assume you referred to cops as "perpetrators" as a slip of the keyboard.

Honestly, I'm not that inhuman to where I could stand to watch a cop get beaten down by a perp. If I saw such action, I would immediately retreat to a safe spot, call 911 and trust the perps in blue to save their own
Click to expand...
Gee, thanks. :rolleyes:

I guess I'm a little surprised to see what I would call an anti-LEO response on this board. Maybe I'm misreading it, or just a little too sensitive, but being a pro-firearms politically conservative kind of guy, I was just a little taken aback by this thread. Try to remember that LEO's are actually people, not some giant nebulous government presence that is out to crush you and take all of your stuff. (that's the Feds :D )

Sorry for the long post, I'm usually not so winded, but someone on this thread asked for a LEO perspective. Here's one of them. I don't speak for any other LEO, just myself.
 
Speaking from a litigation-free standpoint, my approach makes the most sense. I do not get paid to protect police officers lives from criminals (especially since I'm not qualified to determine if they are or are not in fact, criminals). I pay them to make these tough decisions. If I do step in, chances are, the cop will blast me. As a civillian (of course, I'm not using past military training), I do not have POST certification nor do I have the backup of the state for criminal or civil litigation after the circumstances are resolved. If a cop mistakenly blasts an innocent person and it's ruled a "mistake", they most likely lose their jobs.. as a civillian, I most likely go to jail.

I'm not speaking out of my ass. My SO is a police officer. I'm not anti-LEO... and the last thing I want in this world is for someone who has the opportunity to help/prevent a LEO or anyone for that matter being killed/injured to ignore a cry for help. Unfortunately, in the world in which we live in,it's hard enough to justify our own reasons for self defense, let alone justify our defense of yours. You get paid for it. Hell, I got paid when I was in the military, and I didn't ask anyone to help me if I was in danger. As much as you think you want my help, you would be the first person to blast me and brag about it two weeks later at the precinct.

I'm still sickened by the gun grab in NO... and how the police mindlessly followed through with it. I wonder how many LEO's can actually recite somewhat close the Bill of Rights or the first 10 amendments to the constitution. I'm sickened by how so many laws are left up to individual officers discretion regardless of whether the basis for or arrest even exists. But,as I said, I DO have that perspective being so close to "LEO"... it's a constant source of arguments between us. My secondary point being that the so called "blue line"... see the alabama LEO post above.. how so many officers feel obligated to protect even those within their ranks who wantonly disobey the law, so they do not narc on their "brothers"....

Another post for another time... but I'm not totally ignorant.
 
See my post on that other thread as well...
I can assure you that the last thing anyone who comes up and spatters the pavement with the cranial contents of the dirtbag who has his hands around my neck has to worry about is getting blasted by me. We can just agree that our heads are in different places on this one and call it good. Here's to you remaining lawsuit free.
 
Over here in the UK the law reads as follows:

"The individual is under certain common law duties to serve the public. In practice he or she will now be called upon only in exceptional circumstances. Thus, although the maintenance of order is the function of professional police forces, every citizen is under a duty to assist in the quelling of disturbances and the maintenance of the Queen’s peace; and if a person refuses to accede to the request of a magistrate, a sheriff or a constable to assist in preserving the peace, he commits an offence at common law."

Common law is the power of arrest and to deal with or prevent breaches of the peace.

"A constable or an ordinary citizen may at common law arrest without warrant

1. a person committing a breach of the peace in his presence;
2. a person who he reasonably believes will commit such a breach of the peace in the immediate future, even though at the time of the arrest such person has not committed any breach; and

a person who has committed a breach of the peace where it is reasonably believed that a renewal of the breach is threatened. There is no breach of the peace for these purposes unless an act is done or threatened to be done which (a) actually harms a person or, in his presence, his property; (b) is likely to cause such harm; or (c) puts someone in fear of such harm."
 
Some LEOs and attached officials have publicly reccomended that even when one's own home is invaded, that the best course of action is to retreat and not get involved.

Publically, I couldn't imagine any statement from a LEO of any kind about a civilian aiding an officer other than "call 911 and don't get involved."

But this forum, though public, is in actuality very in-formal and personal. Therefore, a LEO here asking us to use common human decency instead of poltical bias in the decision to come to an officer's aid falls on sympathetic ears with me.

But it's not so clear cut.

------------------------------------------

What about a situation where you happen upon one man with a gun drawn on another. Perhaps the second man is on the ground. There is likely to be yelling and confusion.

How do you know who the real BG is? Knee-jerk reaction is that the man with the gun is the assailant, the dangerous one; but that's exactly the perspective that responsible armed civilians wish to abolish: that man + gun = evil.

What if the man with the gun in this situation is actually a plain-clothes officer? You can't count on obvious indicators like a badge hanging around his neck or a radio in hand to identify himself as a LEO. So what do you do?

If you draw on the man, and he is a LEO, you could very well be shot.
If you loudly ask what is going on, and he is a BG, you could very well be shot.

Best I can think of is to approach from the gunman's blind side, draw down, and immedietly inquire if they are a LEO. But it can be very messy no matter who the gunman is so I would honestly be reluctant to get involved at all.

In many cases, I believe, that positioning yourself as a hidden witness to a questionable scenario is the best course of action in regards to being a responsible citizen and helpful to law enforcement, while keeping your personal safety paramount.

---------------------------------------------

If it is blatantly obvious that the victim is a LEO, or that the gunman, in this scenario or another, is definitely not a LEO acting in a non-LEO fashion, then my decision to come to aid would be easier. However, the reluctance wouldn't, and I believe shouldn't, completely disappear.

I'd like to think that my elevated levels of awareness and concern about justice and protection grant me some ability to help my fellow man in need; but really, getting involved in anyone else's mess involving firearms is sticking your own neck out very, very far.

Many of us here list personal protection as one of the very core attractions of firearms, so willfully putting yourself in a dangerous situation can be seen as contradictory.
 
DeepHemet - I can certainly understand and appreciate your point of view and I see where your coming from.

BUT - understand where some regular armed folks are coming from, too. The fact is that the police ARE an instrument of the state. It's not real appropriate for that same state to give you a hard time about being armed, treat you like a criminal if you ever have to defend yourself, and then INSIST and EXPECT you to come to the aid of their enforcement arm in their time of need. That doesn't sit well with some folks.

The New Orleans gun grab is another point. It's certainly not fair to judge all LEO's by the actions of LEO's in New Orleans - but let's face it - LEO's didn't earn any brownie points from the pro-gun folks by mindlessly pulling people out of their homes and stealing their property - because they were ordered to.

Now, make no mistake - I won't judge the intentions of any individual LEO - but the fact is that the police are the enforcement arm of the same government that wants to disarm us by force if necessary. New Orleans proved that. The NO police chief still says that he'll disarm people if necessary, REGARDLESS of what the court says.

What if the LEO in danger is enforcing a law you don't agree with? Does that change anything? If you, as a LEO, were involved in a "gun grab" operation would you still expect armed citizen, knowing they were probably next, to come to your aid if you asked for it?

How many times have we, as CCW folks, been told to "leave the policing to the police?" We're told in many parts of the country that being armed is a bad idea - and if in danger we should call the police and just comply. Don't resist. But if the police officer asks you to put your life on the line for HIM you'd better do it, or else. Doesn't this somehow imply that the life of the LEO is somehow, in the eyes of the law, "more important" than the life of a cvillian? "You shouldn't protect yourself, but you'd better help protect me" sort of mentality?

Anyway, I am just presenting an alternate viewpoint. No offense meant to any individual LEO's who may not personally subscribe to the ideas presented above.
 
Intervention is a heavily debated topic no matter on whose behalf we are intervening on, be it an leo in trouble or regular person in dire straits of some sort. The one common thing that I believe is paramount when you, as an individual take on the responsibility of carrying a firearm is social responsibility.

That does not give you the right to go about pretending to be John Law, nor does it bestow upon you any sort of arrest powers or hero in disguise status. Any state that issues a CCW permit is telling you that you can carry a gun, but don't be an idiot. We as a state are entrustiong you as an individual to be smart about how you use or don't use your weapon. That includes things such as brandishment, negligent discharges, etc. It is assumed by some states, enforced by others that you will get a certain minimum level of training and you will maintain a certain standard of proficieny. That means that you have taken on the responsibility.

Regarding the assistance of a officer of the law, I believe that we have a moral resposibility to render assistance IF IT IS REQUIRED. How do we know if it is required? Training, there is more to packing a blaster than being able to do a sub two second Bill Drill from the holster. You have to know how to assess a situation and react accordingly. How would you know how to handle a possible threat to yourself if you can't interpret a threat to a third party, where you have to luxury of being out of the immeadiate line of fire, most of the time?

A good friend told me once, if you get involved, get fully involved, otherwise, get out of the way. If calling 911 is the limit of your skills, then perhaps you should seriously think about putting your blaster back in the safe, until you can develop the neccesary skills to make a determination.

If my words are a little strong, I apologize however, even here on The High Road I see many people that, like the sheeple we all so despise, are willing to say "Don't get involved, it's not my problem. Let the government/B] handle it.

Best Regards,

Wheeler
 
Wheeler - you seem to think that by carrying a gun we're somehow volunteering to take that "extra step" to protect society or something.

On the contrary - I am taking the extra step to protect me and my own. No one else. If society want folks to start rendering assistance more actively, then they should start protecting people who act in good faith and provide said assistance to private citizens or LEO's.

I don't consider myself as a carrier of a weapon to be some sort of instrument of law and order. I am accepting personal responsibility for my safety and the safety of my wife and child. No one else.

That's not to say I wouldn't stop a rapist in the process of raping a woman. Or a kidnapper taking a child. I would intervene in those situations REGARDLESS of my status as a CCW holder. However I don't see my responsiblity to render aid in those situations as GREATER simply because I carry a gun. I don't think we need that mentality.

This thread was taking about rendering aid to LEO, and legal requirements to do so in some states. That is a different situation. It's bordering on the absurd to demand folks assist LEO's on their request and then provide said citizens no protection from legal or civil action if they somehow screwup for some reason or another.
 
Boy oh boy oh boy.

It really amazes me to no end that a good amount of the people on this board take EVERY opportunity to bash cops--and I mean EVERY opportunity. FTF's remarks, being referred to as "instruments of the state", wow.

You know, it seems to me that the people who make these remarks are the first ones who call the police when something goes wrong. When your little darlings give you a ration of grief; when you hear that bump in the night, you call us, right?

FTF, you say that your significant other is a cop, eh? Wow, what a stance to take. So, here's a scenario for you.

You see a cop getting beat down, pretty badly. You are an armed citizen, and you choose to STAND AWAY AND CALL 911. When you do, it just so happens that there's a unit right around the corner.

The cruiser comes up, screeches to a halt, and out jumps your wife--or husband--and jumps into the fray without hesitation. Being outnumbered, now your SO is receiving the beat down. Would you jump in then? Or would you call 911 again?

And some of you guys wonder why we don't try harder to get friendly with non-LEO's. Or why we refer to non-LEO as civilians. Or why we defend out brother and sister officers without hesitation and most of the time without question...

I've said it before, and I'll say it again...

If you carry a concealed weapon and you will not come to the aid of a fellow human being in need--man, woman, child, LEO, whoever--you are a rank coward, and you don't deserve to breathe the same air that I do.

I do not know of any jurisdiction in this country that will fault you for coming to aid a cop who is getting hurt.

You people who hide behind the threat of litigation sicken me. You're so scared of losing your money that it paralyzes you to inaction and cowardice? Get a grip, folks! As I said before--I'll come to ANYONE's aid who needs it--and here's a laugh for you...

I'm a RESERVE Officer! I don't even get paid for it!
 
If you carry a concealed weapon and you will not come to the aid of a fellow human being in need--man, woman, child, LEO, whoever--you are a rank coward, and you don't deserve to breathe the same air that I do.
Click to expand...

So folks with CCW have MORE of a responsibility to come to the aid of someone than an unarmed person? I was not aware that my status as a CCW permit holder suddenly made me responsible for protecting everyone. I thought CCW was about accepting personal responsibility for one's safety?

Also - are the police NOT the enforcement arm of the state? Is this somehow not true? Are citizens supposed to aid law enforcement when requested REGARDLESS of what law the LEO's are enforcing? I certainly would not have helped anyone haul little old ladies out of their homes in New Orleans, regardless of what the law says.

I served 6 years in the military and I absolutely was an instrument of the federal government. A tool of foreign policy. It's not an insult - it's just a fact. As public servants you are SUPPOSED to be an "instrument of the state." I fail to see why you'd take offense to it, and unless all LEO's are going to quit their posts as soon as they don't agree with the laws they are enforcing, then the statement stands true.

As for folks being somehow anti-law enforcement, let me say this. Everyone on this forum knows who's coming to their doors to confiscate our guns if it ever comes down to that. And New Orleans proved that LEO's will generally follow orders. If you're different than we need more like you and I commend you.

It is however unfair to characterize any criticism of police as "anti-law enforcement." I'll support anyone who IMO is doing the "right thing" but refuse to be forced into supporting anything "just because" someone is a LEO or anything else for that matter.
 
I agree with mmike87 As a gun owner and CCW licence holder I must say that I did not go through all the steps required to obtion my CCW in the off chance that I might happen by a person or LEO in need of help. I got those two items to protect my family,myself, then anyone else that might need help. In that order! Which brings me to my answer. I live in a medium size city with a police and sheriffs dept that has enough employees and officers to do the job. So the only situation that I can think of that would require me to come to the Aide of an LEO would be one that involves a major desaster or something on the large scale. That would put me in the protect my family mode. Most likely protect my family first, hopefully helping an LEO and Protecting my family are the same in that instance.
 
I'd certainly assist a government employee by saying "He went thataway!" and pointing - but since I'm not an LEO or an LEO wannabe, I'm not going to jump in and physically help unless the situation is TRULY exceptional. (One example - an attempted hijacking of an airliner in flight would fit this criterion.)

Does anyone have a case study of a person who was successfully prosecuted for not answering a request for assistance by law enforcement, when such assistance would have put the person at risk?
 
I'd certainly assist a government employee by saying "He went thataway!" and pointing - but since I'm not an LEO or an LEO wannabe, I'm not going to jump in and physically help unless the situation is TRULY exceptional. (One example - an attempted hijacking of an airliner in flight would fit this criterion.)
Click to expand...

I'll clarify my position. I don't mean to imply that people should NEVER provide assistance to a LEO or anyone else for that matter. It's being REQUIRED to provide assistance to a LEO that I take issue with, especially in states that provide you no protection from civil or criminal prosecution.

If that makes me anti-whatever then so be it - I'm not nor have I ever been afraid of labels. But, I WILL think for myself and make my own choices.
 
We all know that the courts have ruled that cops have no duty or requirement to protect civilians, yet we are now being told that civilians have a duty to protect cops.
 
1. I hope I don't find myself in a situation like that.

2. I couldn't pass by. I wouldn't want to live with that for the rest of my life. I couldn't just let my dog bleed to death in the backyard without doing something, and I value people much more that that. It's the "do unto others as you would have them do unto you" belief that I have to live by.

3. I don't think LEOs would be asking the civilians they are trying to disarm to go door to door with them and help with the disarming... There would (should) be enough that they don't need it.

Their's not to reason why,
Their's not to make reply,
Their's but to do and die
Into the valley of death rode the 600.

Are LEOs permitted to disobey an order, if that order is unconstitutional?

4. LEOs aren't obligated and can't protect all the citizens. Maybe it's coming from small town WV, but I can't think of any LEO that would just drive by someone getting beat to death, and not stop. I have a feeling that it's not just WV...
 
I carry a firearm to protect my family and their way of life. Jumping into a situation I know nothing about for someone else does neither. You will get killed or lose everything you have. You will then be wondering why was it again you were carrying?

If a cop is in a bad situation, and already has his weapon out, and sees me pull or approach with another gun, he will either shoot me immediately, or start wondering who he can trust, and suddenly find all his processor speed being used up. I know if it were ME, I would take nothing for granted. I will get no credit or appreciation for assisting, and there is absolutely no way of knowing if I would make the situation better. IF YOU DON'T KNOW, YOU CAN'T START THROWING HOT LEAD.

You will look very foolish indeed in criminal and civil court talking about what you guessed and what you assumed, based on the Walter Mitty projection of how you have always wanted to be Bernie Goetz.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

M
  • Locked
Attn Georgia members whose CCW has taken longer than 60 days to be issued
2 3
Replies
65
Views
5K
Cacique500
C
K
  • Locked
  • Sticky
Civil Liability, Civil Immunity, and the Use of Force
Replies
12
Views
2K
Deep Fried
D
K
  • Locked
On the Cutting, Pasting, and Posting of Statutes
Replies
0
Views
448
Kleanbore
K
Spats McGee
  • Locked
  • Sticky
Spats McGee’s Primer on Civil Rights Litigation and Qualified Immunity
Replies
0
Views
3K
Spats McGee
Spats McGee
K
  • Locked
Castle Doctrine, Stand Your Ground, and Related Concepts
Replies
0
Views
440
Kleanbore
K
Back
Top